Light motor vehicle licence coverage depends on statutory classification, not an assumed transport-vehicle endorsement requirement.

A driver holding a valid light motor vehicle licence is treated as duly licensed where the insured vehicle falls within the statutory weight limit and there is no material showing use as a transport vehicle under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The definitions of motor vehicle, transport vehicle, goods carriage and light motor vehicle must be read harmoniously, and a light motor vehicle is not to be assumed to require a separate transport endorsement merely because of that assumption. On this reasoning, the insurer cannot avoid liability when the policy covers a light motor vehicle and the licence matches that category.

---

---

Issues: Whether a driver holding a licence to drive a light motor vehicle could be treated as duly licensed to drive the insured vehicle, and whether the insurer could avoid liability on the ground that the vehicle was a transport vehicle requiring a specific endorsement.

Analysis: The vehicle was a light motor vehicle within the statutory weight limit, and there was no permit on record showing that it was being used as a transport vehicle under the permit provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The definitions of motor vehicle, transport vehicle, goods carriage, and light motor vehicle had to be read harmoniously, and the Court held that a light motor vehicle cannot be treated as a transport vehicle merely by assumption. The driver held a valid licence for a light motor vehicle, the policy covered a light motor vehicle, and the insurer's objection proceeded on the mistaken premise that every light motor vehicle was necessarily a transport vehicle requiring a separate endorsement.

Conclusion: The driver possessed an effective valid licence for the vehicle, the insurer's defence failed, and the appellant was entitled to succeed.

---